Jim Carr

[Natural Resources, June 7th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, none of the above, and none of the above because Canadians who care about the future of the oil and gas industry as part of a strategy for the Canadian economy know that to be competitive, we want to expand our export markets. Rather than sending 99% of oil and gas exports to one country, the United States, we are opening up the export markets. That is only part of why this pipeline is good for Canada and good for indigenous peoples. It is good for the environment too because of $1.5 billion—

[Natural Resources, June 7th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, phasing out inefficient fuel subsidies is a G20 commitment, and Canada is part of that commitment. We have already taken significant steps in budget 2016 and budget 2017, and we will continue to do that, as it is our international commitment and what we believe is good for the Canadian economy.

[Natural Resources, June 5th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I thought the members opposite were in favour of the pipeline. For months and months, the problem was that we were not doing enough. It is only rhetoric, only words, and now that we decide to de-risk the project, making sure that these jobs will stay in Canada, all of a sudden, we have done too much. We have not done enough; we have done too much.

We want the pipeline built, and by the way, one to export markets is better than zero.

[Indigenous Affairs, June 5th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I was not intending to do that. However, the hon. member knows that there will be different views within communities.

May I ask the hon. member if he has consulted with the 43 communities up and down the line, including 33 communities in British Columbia who stand to benefit from this project?

[Indigenous Affairs, June 5th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows that these projects are, by their very nature, divisive. They are even divisive within political parties. Are you sowing dissent between the premiers of Alberta and British Columbia?

[Indigenous Affairs, June 5th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the hon. member will also know that for the first time in Canadian history, there will be co-development with indigenous communities along the Trans Mountain line.

This co-development will mean that the prosperity that will come to all of Canada, because of the energy development that is so important for the future of the nation, will be shared with indigenous communities. A better life for their children, better education, better access to skills, and community investments, we believe in all of those things. Why do they not?

[Natural Resources, June 5th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, there was unprecedented consultation with indigenous communities, layered on month after month, because of the failure of the Harper government to consult indigenous communities in the northern gateway case.

Not only was there consultation, there was real accommodation. The accommodation takes the form of an unprecedented $1.5 billion oceans protection plan that will be world class. We are proud of that. Why are they not?

[The Environment, May 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is asking the government to speculate hypothetically on what a court may or may not say. We could look retrospectively at what courts have said. Even very recently the Supreme Court has spoken about consultation and actually has sided with the proponent. However, it is not a good idea for us to speculate on what a future court might say on a case that has nothing to do with the ones that have been decided already.

We do know that through this process, there was unprecedented consultation with indigenous people. Forty-three communities signed on to benefit agreements, 33 in—

[Natural Resources, May 28th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, these major energy projects are controversial. They are controversial among provinces. They are even controversial within political parties. There might even be members within the New Democratic Party, maybe even from Alberta, who think it is good for Canada. I do not know.

We also know there are 43 indigenous communities, 33 of which are in the province of British Columbia, that think it is a good idea, because they believe that the future of our energy resources should be a shared prosperity and indigenous peoples should be part of it.

[Natural Resources, May 28th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member wants to talk about a disaster, it was the Harper Conservative disaster. Not one kilometre of pipe built to new markets, an inability to consult with indigenous peoples that led to failure in one court case after another, and the worst economic performance since the Great Depression, that is a disaster.